Re: [RFC PATCH V3 0/5] Hi:
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Date: 2019-01-07 03:53:50
Also in:
kvm, lkml, virtualization
On 2019/1/7 上午11:28, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 10:19:03AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:quoted
On 2019/1/3 上午4:47, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:quoted
On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 08:46:51PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:quoted
This series tries to access virtqueue metadata through kernel virtual address instead of copy_user() friends since they had too much overheads like checks, spec barriers or even hardware feature toggling.Will review, thanks! One questions that comes to mind is whether it's all about bypassing stac/clac. Could you please include a performance comparison with nosmap?On machine without SMAP (Sandy Bridge): Before: 4.8Mpps After: 5.2MppsOK so would you say it's really unsafe versus safe accesses? Or would you say it's just a better written code?
It's the effect of removing speculation barrier.
quoted
On machine with SMAP (Broadwell): Before: 5.0Mpps After: 6.1Mpps No smap: 7.5Mpps Thanksno smap being before or after?
Let me clarify: Before (SMAP on): 5.0Mpps Before (SMAP off): 7.5Mpps After (SMAP on): 6.1Mpps Thanks _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization